Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
If the Democrats included a roll back of the Bush tax cuts, in the bill to fund the war, what would happen?
The war has already cost over 400 billion dollars, all paid for with borrowed money. Suppose instead of a timetable to end the war, the Democrats took the position that it was time to put the war on a pay as you go basis, rather than passing the entire cost on to the next generation through deficit spending.
So if Bush wants a 100 billion dollars to fund his war over the next year, suppose the Democrats included a provision in the funding bill to temporarily roll back enough of the Bush tax cuts to raise 100 billion dollars during the same period. A true conservative would support putting a spending program with no fixed end on a pay as you go basis. What would happen? - Would Bush veto such a bill? How would the Republicans attack the Democrats? Maybe the Democrats idea a timetable for withdrawal would start to look better to the Republicans.
As some of you have pointed out, we would probably get the old argument from the Republicans, that higher tax rates produce lower tax receipts for the government - (The Laffer curve argument) - This argument has been rejected by both Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernake and it has proved to be untrue since Reagan. For some people, no tax cut for the rich is big enough, no matter how big a deficit it creates.
If the argument were true, we might as well reduce income taxes rates to zero, and borrow all the money to run the government - Never mind how it will be paid back.
One person ("Stereotypeme") says that taxes are are so high now that there is little incentive to work more - and there is some truth to what he says. - A person earning $60,000 per year pays Federal Income Tax at a marginal rate of about 27% plus FICA tax (including the employer's share) of 15.3%, a total of 42.5%, plus any state income tax. However, as a result of the Bush tax cuts a person making $1,000,000 per year from interest and qualified dividends pays Federal Income tax at a 15% rate, and no FICA tax. The Bush tax cuts reduced the top capital gains rate from 20% to 15% and for the first time, taxed qualified dividends at a top rate of 15% rather than at ordinary income tax rates. In theory, the FICA taxes are all supposed to be used for Social Security benefits, but in practice, much of the FICA money is being borrowed by the government and used to finance the war, and the low capital gains and dividends rates that are primarily enjoyed by the rich.
7 Answers
- Myles DLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
great idea actually, it would make him take "ownership" of it because he would have to make a sacrifice int he way of explaining it to the taxpayers who are footing the bill. People might actually demand to know where the heck the money is going really.
- 1 decade ago
They'll have to put me in jail. I cannot pay another dime because the Feds take 30% now. These Liberals who talk about tax cuts for "the rich" have no idea what rich is. They think someone making 150K is rich. After the Fed government takes 50K, the State takes 10K, the city takes 7K, what's the difference between 150K and 90K? Not much because at 90K you're only paying about 20K total. It's a joke. We have socialism now, and the Democrats are screaming about a fair tax plan????? The Liberals throw around the rhetoric about the middle class shrinking. Guess WHY???????
Why are government receipt up, then???? A strong economy means more than tax increases. There is no incentive to work anymore, and the Democrats plan will make it worse.
You used an extreme to make a comparison??? How many people make $1,000,000? Don't they already pay $350,000? You only mention dividends. We'd have to include taxing PENSIONS if you want to increase that tax. People making over 100K are barely getting by, just like people making 60K or 70K! That's a more realistic scenerio. Socialism! I don't understand the Liberals. They simply want to nail everyone, and they're not going to be satisfied until we are ALL poor.
I live it. Liberal NY State! Tax, tax, tax, and when that's not enough...surcharge, tolls, fees, etc. They take half now!
- desotobraveLv 61 decade ago
You can't necessarily raise tax revenue. You can only raise tax rates, which changes the available options to those who have money. It is somewhat likely that rolling the tax rates back up could produce LESS government revenue.
Franklin, our current tax revenue is higher than it was before we lowered tax rates.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Higher taxes but lower tax receipts due to job losses, fewer job starts, recession, lower prosperity, lower standard of living for the middle class and lower class, declining stock market, but great JOY for all liberals who love seeing the government making the other guy suffer--never realizing it's themselves who suffer, also.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- commanderbuck383Lv 51 decade ago
Nope..leave the tax cuts, remove some socialistic whacko programs, and cut Congressional pay !
Now THERE'S a fiscal plan if I ever heard one !
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Interesting take...we should be paying as we go
